Navigate:

What if George W. Bush had done that?

Some critics say Bush would have taken a lot more heat for things Obama has done. | AP Photos

The travel has produced Republican National Committee email blasts, news reports and questions at the White House press briefings, but nothing approaching the drumbeat of criticism that Bush received. Personalities may also come into play. Liberal suspicion and fear of Karl Rove as a sinister force overseeing Bush’s political operation likely fueled both a congressional probe and a five-year federal investigation of the Bush White House that concluded that taxpayers funds were misused but resulted in no formal charges or action.

Text Size

-

+

reset

When Vice President Dick Cheney met privately with oil company executives to talk about energy policy, he was excoriated for being an industry stooge and wound up on the receiving end of lawsuits that went all the way to the Supreme Court.

Yet, Obama has repeatedly met with CEOs behind closed doors with little outcry about whether he’s in the tank for business interests.

Last February, he had a sit-down in Silicon Valley with the CEOs of Twitter, NetFlix, Apple, Facebook and Google. In August, the heads of American Express, Xerox, Wells Fargo and Johnson & Johnson were among those who won a cozy Roosevelt Room meeting with Obama. And in 2010, JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon had a one-on-one with Obama in the Oval Office. All had the chance to plead their case, and their companies’ case, privately with the president.

The private confabs generate less suspicion because the media consensus — and, to some extent, that of watchdog groups — is that Obama and the business leaders have a strained relationship. Since he’s not seen as being in the pocket of business, the secrecy produces few complaints — even though the potential for the kind of lobbying Obama has criticized is obvious.

The press and public haven’t always been locked out of such meetings. When Obama met with CEOs who are part of the Business Roundtable in 2009, both his speech and the ensuing question-and-answer session were open to the press and cameras. However, when Obama spoke to the group last week, his remarks were open, but journalists were kicked out when the CEOs engaged with the president.

A Business Roundtable spokesman couldn’t explain why the 2009 session was open but said the closure last week was a joint decision with the White House. “In inviting the President to our meeting, when we began to discuss the arrangements with the White House, we mutually agreed that a closed door session would result in the most productive dialogue,” spokesman Carter Wood wrote in an email.

Obama’s CEO-laden Jobs Council does meet publicly with him from time to time, but the panel’s work is done largely behind closed doors, in conference calls, emails and subcommittee meetings that are closed to the public.

Readers' Comments (937)

...oh please. To hear people tell it, Obama is Hitler, the Anti-Christ, and a black Karl Marx all rolled up into one. He's the most disrespected and villified president in American history. The man can hadly sneeze without it being deemed a "job killing bodily function."

On the selfish note I'm personally grateful to our president that since his election all the noisy anti-war protests here in CA simply disappeared without a trace and now I can drive through Hollywood without any additional traffic jams they used to generate.

I think its funny that Obama gets accused of all kinds of ridiculous things he hasn't done, that the things he does do go under the radar; both good and bad. I guess its the fallout from the deranged way the right analyses Obama's Presidency.

Domestic oil production is higher than at any time under Bush and yet Obama gets accused of being anti-oil and plotting to increase oil price. Obama has deported more illegal aliens than Bush ever did and he gets accused of being weak on border control. Obama has taken out more Al Queda operatives - and many high profile ones - and yet gets accused of being weak on the "war on terror". If the opposition cant make a sane, fact based assessment of the President, then he can get away with doing a lot of things he probably shouldn't.

Interesting article but no surprise. Anyone can see how President Obama has gotten away with things NO other president could have - they probably could find things with Clinton that were a big deal but not with Obama. I don't know if it's everyone's afraid to say anything because then they are labeled a "racist" or because we just don't have investigative reporters who really ask questions that they should be (o thats right Obamam's made sure we don't get any of those!).

I think that 50% of liberal voters will see this as a hit piece on President Obama. The president exceeded expectations, even though everything was so much worse than anyone could have know. He tried to keep his promises, but Republicans lied, cheated and stole at every turn. In total, the president has "grown" into his job.

The other 50% will agree with most of what is written and summarize the article, the president has let all of us down.

I'm feeling less generous today. This article was written with perfect 20/20 hindsight. An article like this would have been blasphemy in 2008. In 2008, nothing, let me spell that for you, N - O - T - H - I - N - G, was written about what this man had ever done or had accomplished or created. All we ever got was what he will do, how much he wants to save us and trite and trivial crap.

Don't worry, he has plenty of promises left to get this country through the next five years.

For all the talk Republicans like to shout about how "Jon Stewart is a clown" or how he only goes after conservatives, he has never shied away from pointing to Obama acting like a hypocrite. Stewart's primary focus, as much as Republicans may hate him, isn't pandering to the left, or purely insulting the right.

No, Stewart's primary focus is on exposing just how shallow our mainstream news media really is. It's not a 'conservative or democrat' thing, as this article explains, news that fits into a narrative tends to be more heavily promoted than news that doesn't. "Obama is painted as a radical liberal, so Bush-like policies are ignored, but the contraceptive debate is blown up". You didn't even find Fox News taking Obama to task for this measure, because as made clear, many policies like that are popular among conservatives.

It's not that the media is so liberal skewed, it's that it simply is shallow, they have adopted a practice of stoking fires for ratings and abandoned basic principles of journalism. The only real thing news outlets care about is money, they'd make just as much with Romney in office as they would with Obama. It's the same reason that the media cared about Rush's statements so much more than Maher's, because Maher is a much smaller figure among the Democratic party, so taking him to task for his comments are likely to gain far less viewership/readership. Less viewership, less ad revenue, thus less important the news is judged to be.

Jon Stewart spends most of his program doing what proper media outlets aren't willing to, by exposing shallowness and carelessness in reporting.

...oh please. To hear people tell it, Obama is Hitler, the Anti-Christ, and a black Karl Marx all rolled up into one. He's the most disrespected and villified president in American history. The man can hadly sneeze without it being deemed a "job killing bodily function."

---------------

WHAT? Where were you back in 2004 - the MOON? or better yet, were you a teenager back in the Bush years? Bush was called a Hitler, anti-Christ, and idiot, the wost president, anti-American, war criminal, etc. ALL ROLLED UP INTO ONE!~

Liberals like you spent at least 6 years bashing and insulting President Bush. We haven't done half to Obama of what you did to Bush, so spare me your selective outcry! Don't forget, Bush was blamed for EVERYTHING that happened in America including Al Gore's divorse!

Old news I wrote a paper on this over 2 years ago explaining that Bush was more open about his policies than he should have been because he wanted to establish a doctrine of the unitary executive while Obama is just being smarter about it (ie. not using provocative signing statements, executive orders etc.). i am not sure why people can't just admit that obama's policies in regards to civil liberties are virtually identical to bush's. its just the ideology that is different.

I felt that I should also add, it's not entirely new that presidents get free passes on things that don't fit into a standard narative. A Democrat could never have opened talks with communist China, or else they would have been eaten alive as being 'soft on communism', but a Republican like Nixon could do it just fine. Frankly, as much of a Democrat I may be, I quite respect Nixon's foreign policy when it came to China and the Soviet Union. His good policy decisions often get lost in the sea that was Watergate.

I think its funny that Obama gets accused of all kinds of ridiculous things he hasn't done, that the things he does do go under the radar; both good and bad. I guess its the fallout from the deranged way the right analyses Obama's Presidency.

Domestic oil production is higher than at any time under Bush and yet Obama gets accused of being anti-oil and plotting to increase oil price. Obama has deported more illegal aliens than Bush ever did and he gets accused of being weak on border control. Obama has taken out more Al Queda operatives - and many high profile ones - and yet gets accused of being weak on the "war on terror". If the opposition cant make a sane, fact based assessment of the President, then he can get away with doing a lot of things he probably shouldn't.

------------------

No sir. We are using the same yard stick you used to measure President Bush. You forget Candidate Obama and then President Obama spent 4 years blaming Bush for everything. You forget Democrats blamed Bush for simple things such as going on vacation, or traffic jams in DC.

Speaking of Domestic oil production being higher. Well that's because of the Bush policies. Bet you won't give him credit. Obama is accused of being anti oil because he said so himself. He even called Senators to kill the Kingstone Pipeline. He even said that "under his plan, energy costs would necessarily go up". His Energy Secretary said that "it was Obama's goal to have the gas prices equal to those in Europe". So yes, his actions prove that he is against oil and your words prove that you still won't credit Bush for anything.

On illegal immigration: It is the president's job to have a policy that ensures anyone here illegally is not in the country. You are crediting Obama for doing something exceptional when that is already his job. You see, you just set the bar so low for this Administration that anything he does, you call it a success.

Bush and Obama have taken Al Queda operatives. Bet you won't credit Bush with taking out Saddam Hussein, but you will credit Obama for taking out Osama BinLaden using Bush's policies.

Obama is not accused of being weak on the war on terror. He's accused of being a weak president with all the apologies he's been offering. he bowed to 2 kings. He apologized to the world in his speach in Germany. He apologizes for every event that our man and women in uniform do, yet he won't apologize for the death of American soldiers.

So there you go. I assessed the president based on facts. Now, read my signature phrase.

This is what we get when politics devolves to a series of images that have no meaning outside of the paper or television they're displayed on. Obama is living off of the fumes of personality and the media that has so graciously supported him has made every attempt to hide any personal or political flaws.

I hope they're happy that the dog they brought to the white house is finally turning on them when they have ceased to be useful.

Jon Stewart spends most of his program doing what proper media outlets aren't willing to, by exposing shallowness and carelessness in reporting.

I would believe this if I haven't seen episodes of Stewart outright mocking the right while supporting the left. Interviews such as the time he spoke on his opinion of how WWII should have been engaged makes me believe the only thing he's interested in is snark against anything that he doesn't personally believe in.

That being said - he has from time to time shown disdain for the love affair the media has had with leftist politicians. You are correct though, in my mind, the enemy to conservatism is not the left and it isn't political figures like Obama, it's the media.

People are calling Obama the same things that liberals called Bush back then. Have you ever read the comment sections at Fox News? It gets to be just as ugly as all of the things liberals (myself included) accused Bush of. I don't deny it, I was often using rather extreme rethoric, and was rather unrealistic with my percieved destruction of the US. That said, I wasn't very happy with two unfunded wars, one of which I especially felt was ENTIRELY unnecessary. So I insulted Bush. Over, and over, and over.

But if you honestly don't belive Republicans have shouted the exact same type of hateful rethoric against Obama as Democrats did with Bush, then you've been letting your own confirmation bais blind you. Spend ten minutes reading what people have to say about Obama over at Fox News. Then try telling me 'liberals said way worse things'.

I really find the 'make fun of Obama's name' tactic to be particuarly funny. From 'obamao' to 'Obummer' to even 'ObaMao', there seems to be no shortage of the ways that Republicans currently insult Obama by name alone. Reminds me of all of the Bush monkey pictures. Neither side is above childish ranting and screaming. I participated in it back when Bush was in office, then again, I was still a teenager, so ostensibly I'd be a bit better behaved and a bit more rational whenever another Republican eventually makes it into the White House. (Unlikely to be 2012, I doubt I'll have a President Romney, but who knows, I didn't think Bush would get reelected, so what do I know?)

BTW, I dare any liberal tell me Obama has been insulted more times than Sarah Palin. This is why we call you out all the time. Your selective outcry and outrage, not to mention your hypocrisy in demanding that one be treated with kids gloves while the other must be harassed, insulted, and have her character assassinated all over the media come from your extreme liberal views.

Has any of you apologized to Sarah Palin for all the insults? **Crickets** well then spare me your fake tears about this article, which FINALLY begins giving an attempt to recognize President Bush's hard work!

After a huge marketing campaign in which Bush bashing was a big tool , candidate BHO was elected President . He may not have much bashed Bush directly but his whole team did it big time.

Once the man became Da MAN in the WH , after all the ceremonies, he sat at the Oval , had some chicken wings and watermelon and decided to work as the POTUS. Problem is, Da Man wasn't up to the task . What the heck am I gonna do as from now , asked Barry to himself . The fast and easy solution was just to let things roll on, do whatever GWB did or would have done but with a perconal touch so it looked " authentic". Yes the troops pulled outta Iraq but wasn't that all predictable during late Bush years ? Osama was popped thanks to some Special Services, BO simply said "yes" when the plan was shown to him . Gitmo ? no more questions for the moment .

This is not fresh news and some governments have quickly found the weak spot in this US administration. BHO is under pressure from Iran , from high gas prices, from China and from inside the country. If Iran attacks Israel or vice versa BHO will look for a solution the kind Bush would have done . Let's hope his assumptions will prove right.

Well, yes, he is, very clearly, and openly, a liberal. He therefore is always going to make snarky comments about policies he finds absurd, while championing things he legitimatly cares about. He doesn't spend his show pretending there is no bias at all. I said the PRIMARY focus of his show is to show the shallowness and carelessness of the media, I didn't say he artificially attempts to pander to a middle ground for appearence of a non-existant 'balance'. That's in many respects one of my biggest problems with the media, is the posturing to seem balenced on all issues.

Even in this comment thread alone, we have one person accusing Politico of shilling for Republicans, but you can find plenty of other articles where conservatives accuse Politico of shilling for Democrats. The idea of 'you must strike both sides evenly' has gotten so out of hand that people on both sides cry out 'persecution' whenever they see an unfavorable article targeting them, and confirmation bias makes people much more likely to forget articles favorable to them, and remember articles unfavorable, so that, no matter what, they'll always say 'no but there are more articles that disagree with my side!'

It's the problem of artificial pandering, and what I find particuarly refreshing about Stewart is he doesn't bother to do that. When he takes liberals to task, he is sincear because you clearly already know this guy's political views. There's no feigning a completely balenced perspective, like they do at CNN, which leaves conservatives calling it liberal, and liberals calling it conservative, with no one realizing that all CNN cares about is fake controversy to sell advertising.

People are calling Obama the same things that liberals called Bush back then. Have you ever read the comment sections at Fox News? It gets to be just as ugly as all of the things liberals (myself included) accused Bush of. I don't deny it, I was often using rather extreme rethoric, and was rather unrealistic with my percieved destruction of the US. That said, I wasn't very happy with two unfunded wars, one of which I especially felt was ENTIRELY unnecessary. So I insulted Bush. Over, and over, and over.

But if you honestly don't belive Republicans have shouted the exact same type of hateful rethoric against Obama as Democrats did with Bush, then you've been letting your own confirmation bais blind you. Spend ten minutes reading what people have to say about Obama over at Fox News. Then try telling me 'liberals said way worse things'.

I really find the 'make fun of Obama's name' tactic to be particuarly funny. From 'obamao' to 'Obummer' to even 'ObaMao', there seems to be no shortage of the ways that Republicans currently insult Obama by name alone. Reminds me of all of the Bush monkey pictures. Neither side is above childish ranting and screaming. I participated in it back when Bush was in office, then again, I was still a teenager, so ostensibly I'd be a bit better behaved and a bit more rational whenever another Republican eventually makes it into the White House. (Unlikely to be 2012, I doubt I'll have a President Romney, but who knows, I didn't think Bush would get reelected, so what do I know?)

---------------------

Yes I have and that's why I spend my time on POLITICO and not FoxNews. Have you seen the articles and comments of the Daily Kos or Media Matters? I used to until I couldn't handle it anymore. I still have a list on my facebook of the things bloggers on Media Matters called me when I told them I was hispanic. Bet you'd vomit after you read them! yes your side calls itself "tolerant" until you have difference of opinion and are a minority! Spare me your selective outcry over FoxNews and go see Media Matters for a list of insults.

Again, we are using the same yard stick on President44 that you used on Presidet43. Tell you what, if President44 comes out and retracts all the blame he put on President43 for 4 years and reaches out to President Bush, apologizes and then tells America to unite, he'd have his re-election in his hand!

Sir. We are told not to call President Obama - Barack Hussein Obama - otherwise we are racists. We are racists according to you just because we disagree with his policies. As a Mexican American, I have been called racist just for denouncing President Obama's policies. Read my words, have I insulted him? NO~ yet, liberals don't hesitate to call me a racist.

Finally, I was a grown man during the Bush years and even wiser during the Obama years. I assure you that both sides have done their share of insults equal to one another on both presidents. But the US MEDIA has tried so hard to protect President44 that this article is spot on!